| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9 July 2007 : Column 1238W—continued
| 2005-06 | |||
| Serious violence and drugs | Offences of dishonesty | Miscellaneous | |
| 2006-07 | ||
| Serious violence and drugs | Offences of dishonesty | |
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many law practices in Wales received funds through the Legal Services Commission for (a) legal aid advice and assistance and (b) legal aid including representation, in each of the last seven years, broken down by (i) type of case and (ii) the lowest-level geographical areas for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement; [146846]
(2) how many applications for legal aid in Wales were (a) accepted and (b) rejected in each of the last seven years, broken down by (i) the lowest level areas for which figures are available, (ii) the type of case and (iii) the nature of the work which the legal aid was applied for; and if he will make a statement; [146857]
(3) how much legal aid funding was provided by the Legal Services Commission in each of the smallest geographical areas of Wales for which figures are available in each of the last seven years, broken down by (a) the type of case and (b) the nature of the work for which the legal aid was paid; and if he will make a statement; [146911]
(4) how many legal cases in Wales received legal aid in each of the last seven years, broken down by (a) the lowest possible geographical areas for which figures are available, (b) the type of case and (c) the type of work for which the legal aid was paid; and if he will make a statement. [147010]
Bridget Prentice: There are 22 bid zones within Wales, and seven categories of work. The categories include Legal Help, CLS Direct, civil representation, Criminal Lower, Criminal Higher, Criminal Case Contracts and CDS Direct.
Each type of work will have its own further category of law (an average of 10 categories). Providing this information over seven years would produce an answer which would include more than 10,000 items of data. The information requested is therefore not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Magistrates Courts
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what the average time was between the first hearing after charge in the magistrates' court and the date when magistrates committed a case for trial at the Crown court in the last 12 months; [147955]
(2) how many and what proportion of cases listed for a committal hearing at magistrates' courts were not effective and adjourned to another day in the last 12 months; [147956]
(3) in how many adjourned committal hearings adjournment was sought by the (a) prosecution and (b) defence in the last 12 months; [147957]
(4) in how many cases adjournment was sought in committal hearings because papers for the committal were prosecution papers not ready to be presented to the court in the last 12 months; [147958]
(5) what the average length of adjournment was in cases where hearings listed for committal were adjourned for another committal hearing on another day in the last 12 months; [147998]
(6) what the average length of adjournment between a defendant's first appearance in court after charge and the first listing for a committal hearing was in the last 12 months; [147999]
(7) what records are kept of the reasons for adjournment of committal hearings; [148000]
(8) how many cases in magistrates' courts in England and Wales were listed for committal more than (a) once and (b) twice in the last 12 months; [148001]
(9) how many committal hearings were listed in magistrates' courts in England and Wales in the last 12 months; [148002]
(10) whether he has made an estimate of the cost to (a) defendants, (b) their employers and (c) others involved besides the Court and the prosecution of non-effective committal hearings. [148022]
Maria Eagle: The following table presents key statistics on the progression of committal proceedings in the magistrates courts.
No centrally-collated information is available on the reasons for, or the costs arising from, adjournments in committal proceedings. However, in the year ending March 2007, there were 3,057 magistrates courts trials that were ineffective because the prosecution was not ready (1.7 per cent. of all recorded trials in the period), and a further 4,218 ineffective because the defence was not ready (2.3 per cent. of recorded trials). Equivalent figures are not available for committal proceedings.
No information is available on the total number of committal hearings listed in the magistrates courts in England and Wales. However, the table shows that:
there were around 98,000 cases in the magistrates courts in 2005 which were disposed of through committal or sending to the Crown Court
there were an average of 2.6 listings per case in 2006 (covering the whole duration of these cases in the magistrates courts)
On this basis, it can be estimated that cases committed or sent to the Crown Court account for an approximate total of 255,000 listings per year in the magistrates courts.
| Key statistics on indictable and triable either way magistrates court cases in England and Wales that were committed for sentence or trial in the Crown Court, 2006 | |||||||
| Estimates from the magistrates courts time intervals survey 2006 | |||||||
| Total number of cases per year (2005) | Average number of days from first listing to completion (days) | 95% confidence interval (+/- days) | Percentage of cases completed at first listing (i.e. with no adjournments) | Average number of adjournments (number) | Average length of adjournments (days) | Number of defendants in TIS survey sample | |
| Notes: 1. Data on the total number of cases is taken from the Home Office publication “Criminal Statistics 2005". This is the most recent full year for which published data are available. All other date are taken from the Time Intervals Survey (TIS) in the magistrates courts. The TIS is a sample survey that produces estimates of the average time taken between stages of proceedings for defendants in completed criminal cases in magistrates' courts. More Information on TIS is available from the Ministry of Justice website. 2. All 'committals' statistics shown above include cases which were sent to the Crown Court for trial without committal proceedings, under section 51 of the Crime and Disorder Ad 1998. The above figures relate to both adult and youth defendants, and include both summonsed and charged cases. This TIS data relates to indictable and triable either way cases only, and therefore excludes the small number of summary cases that are committed to the Crown Court However, these cases will be counted in the total number of cases per year. 3. “First listing” refers to the first listed hearing of the case in the magistrates courts Figures for adjournments relate to the whole duration of the case in the magistrates courts, and will therefore count adjournments to other hearings besides the committal hearing. Figures are not available on the number of adjournments by hearing type. The number of adjournments in any given case is defined as being one less than the number of times the case was listed. A listing refers to any occasion when the case was considered by the court. The average number of adjournments is the average across all cases, including those which were completed at first listing and where no adjournments occurred. The average length of adjournments is calculated by dividing the duration of a case (from first listing to completion) by the number of adjournments that occurred. | |||||||
Prisoners: Facilities
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) pursuant to the answer of 2 July 2007, Official Report, columns 912-3W, on prisoners: facilities, how many prisoners categorised as vulnerable have been held in police and court cells since January 2006; [147976]
(2) how many prisoners have been held in (a) court cells and (b) police cells for two or more successive nights over the last 12 months; [148053]
(3) through which bodies food is provided to prisoners housed in police and court cells; [148054]
(4) how many prisoners have spent their first night in custody in a police or court cell since January 2006; and (a) where, (b) by whom and (c) at what point in custody such prisoners’ (i) drug treatment, (ii) detoxification and (iii) wider health needs were assessed. [148055]
Mr. Hanson: All efforts are made to avoid housing prisoners vulnerable to self harm or with drugs or health needs in police cells under Operation Safeguard and in court cells. The information requested is not held centrally. Those identified as at risk of self-harm or self-inflicted death will have that identified on their PER (Prisoner Escort Record) form.
The number of prisoners who have spent two or more successive nights in police cells under Operation Safeguard is not centrally held. Since January 2007, 35 prisoners have been held exceptionally in court cells for two successive nights.
The provision of food to prisoners held in police or court cells is the responsibility of the individual police force or custody contractor.
The number of prisoners who spent their first night in custody under Operation Safeguard or in court cells is not held centrally.
Prisoners: Learning Disability
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what support there is from within the Probation Service for people on probation with learning disabilities; [148112]
(2) what support there is from within the Prison Service for prisoners with learning disabilities. [148115]
Mr. Hanson: People with learning disabilities have the same rights as other citizens. To help ensure they receive the extra support to which they entitled under the under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, the Care Services Improvement Partnership (CSIP), part of the Department of Health, has produced the document ‘Positive Practice, Positive Outcomes; A handbook for Professionals in the Criminal Justice System working with offenders with learning disabilities’ (CSIP, 2007).
This sets out the support that must be provided by the police, the courts, in prisons and on probation.
A copy has been placed in the Libraries of the House.
Prisons: Crimes of Violence
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) prisoner on prisoner and (b) prisoner on officer assaults were recorded in each month in each year since 2002, broken down by prison establishment; and if he will make a statement. [147387]
Mr. Hanson: The information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, I refer the hon. Lady to the table of annual figures that I have placed in the Libraries of the House.
Young Offenders: Restraints Techniques
Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how often the (a) figure of four hold and (b) double basket hold was used in each secure training centre in each of the last seven years. [147708]
Mr. Hanson: To provide the information requested would require secure training centres to review every individual incident report to identify which techniques were used in the course of incidents, therefore the information is not collected centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
The double embrace technique used in the seated position was withdrawn by the Youth Justice Board in June 2004, and subsequently discontinued on the advice of the expert panel.
Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what response was made by (a) the Youth Justice Board and (b) the Home Office to the representations from NCH on the risks of restraint in secure training centres. [147710]
Mr. Hanson: A report was commissioned in 2003 by the Youth Justice Board from the National Children's Bureau. The report raised no specific risks related to restraints in the secure training centres, but raised a number issues affecting the whole of the juvenile secure estate.
In response to the report, the Youth Justice Board developed a code of practice for managing challenging behaviour in all parts of the secure estate. It has also instituted a behaviour management programme, which deals with a number of the issues raised in the report.
Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice on how many occasions pain distraction techniques to the (a) nose, (b) thumb and (c) rib were used in each secure training centre in each of the last five years. [147711]
Mr. Hanson: The available information, provided by the Youth Justice Board, is given in the following table.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |